I (and many others) have seen that techs get cheaper --especially in early game-- the more civs you meet. Does anyone know what exactly is the formula behind it? For example does it work with "the number of civs you met" or "the percentage of civs you met"?

Thanks in advance.

I (and many others) have seen that techs get cheaper --especially in early game-- the more civs you meet. Does anyone know what exactly is the formula behind it? For example does it work with "the number of civs you met" or "the percentage of civs you met"? ...
Ummm -- I don't think so. Your perception that techs get cheaper in the early game "the more civs you meet" is wrong. The techs seem to get cheaper in the early game because your capitol and other cities are growing quickly. Every increase in population will cause a corresponding decrease in research time because :c5science: directly correlates with population.

I haven't looked into this a great deal but isn't it based on how many civs already know the tech so the more that already knwo it the cheaper it becomes for others to learn it?

I haven't looked into this a great deal but isn't it based on how many civs already know the tech so the more that already knwo it the cheaper it becomes for others to learn it?

I think it's that way. You don't need to meet any other civs to get that boost.

I'm fairly sure it's not because of pop growth... I've seen MadDjinn and WainyCiv mention it too in their Deity Let's Play's. Can anyone confirm this?

I haven't looked into this a great deal but isn't it based on how many civs already know the tech so the more that already knwo it the cheaper it becomes for others to learn it?

That was in Civ IV. Not in Civ V, when was released. So unless it was changed in some patch, there is no technology discount. You can try to modify GlobalDefines.xml.

This one seems like 30% discount, if every other civs know given technology. But it hasn't any impact, when I modified it. It was probably just copied from Civ IV, when Civ V was developed...
- <Row Name="TECH_COST_TOTAL_KNOWN_TEAM_MODIFIER">
<Value>30</Value>
</Row>

When you play, you can see some civs really behind in research. They should reintroduce this modifier. And it shouldn't be 30%, but something like 90%, if you are last one.

When you play, you can see some civs really behind in research. They should reintroduce this modifier. And it shouldn't be 30%, but something like 90%, if you are last one.

Why? It doesn't make sense to me that if a Civ is unable to tech, it will get techs virtually free.

- <Row Name="TECH_COST_TOTAL_KNOWN_TEAM_MODIFIER">
<Value>30</Value>
</Row>

That is regarding multi-player games ... for when you have multiple players on a single team. Not for AI civs.

I (and many others) have seen that techs get cheaper --especially in early game-- the more civs you meet. Does anyone know what exactly is the formula behind it? For example does it work with "the number of civs you met" or "the percentage of civs you met"?
Your perception that techs get cheaper in the early game "the more civs you meet" is wrong. The techs seem to get cheaper in the early game because your capitol and other cities are growing quickly. Every increase in population will cause a corresponding decrease in research time because :c5science: directly correlates with population.
I haven't looked into this a great deal but isn't it based on how many civs already know the tech so the more that already knwo it the cheaper it becomes for others to learn it?
I think it's that way. You don't need to meet any other civs to get that boost.
No. This is just plain wrong; where do ideas like this come from??:confused:
I'm fairly sure it's not because of pop growth... I've seen MadDjinn and WainyCiv mention it too in their Deity Let's Play's. Can anyone confirm this?
C'mon! I wasn't making this stuff up! You get :c5science: at the get-go just based on population. When you build libraries, universities, public schools, etc. you get more :c5science: per pop than without these science buildings. With science multipliers like the National College and the Observatory you get another 50% more :c5science: for that city.

In support of the more known civs have researched the tech:

In the same column of the tech tree, techs generally have the same number of turns to research -- you have to look ahead to see this since earlier columns may have already been affected.

As you proceed through the game, especially if you are behind in tech or if an AI has beelined. The research time (turns) indicated on a tech column may show different numbers of turns for techs which originally started out with the same turn requirements.

The theory can be tested empirically if you compare techs often enough and throughout the game. Unless, of course, you and the AI are always following the same path tech by tech through the tech tree and you are ahead or even with them.

I'll check it myself next game. It either happens or it does not. Our opinions don't change the way it works.

No. This is just plain wrong; where do ideas like this come from??:confused:
They get it from paying attention.

C'mon! I wasn't making this stuff up! You get :c5science: at the get-go just based on population. When you build libraries, universities, public schools, etc. you get more :c5science: per pop than without these science buildings. With science multipliers like the National College and the Observatory you get another 50% more :c5science: for that city.

Yes the more science you have the faster techs get researched, but it doesn't make them cheaper. Go to the tech tree when you reach the renaissance era. Check the :c5science: cost for techs in the same level of the tree. If you are ahead of everyone in tech, this won't work. If there are multiple civs ahead of you in tech, then you will see that techs that are in the same level will cost different amounts.

Maybe MadDjinn or WainyCiv can confirm this too, since they were the ones to say it first (at least, from the LP's that I've seen so far). Or at least someone who knows and is 100% sure if that's true or not. If it is, there must be a certain formula for it. If not, I'm just wrong.

No. This is just plain wrong; where do ideas like this come from??:confused:

In Civ4 it was just like that. Apparently not in Civ5 then.

Someone more knowledgeable than us has already posted the formula (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10469954&postcount=83).

Short answer, the number of civs you know who know the tech reduces the cost.

Someone more knowledgeable than us has already posted the formula (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10469954&postcount=83).

Short answer, the number of civs you know who know the tech reduces the cost.

That's stupid. It means that an isolated civ is in even worse situation tech vise. What were the devs thinking, again?

That's stupid. It means that an isolated civ is in even worse situation tech vise. What were the devs thinking, again?

Why shouldn't an isolated CIV be in worse position tech wise? Learning something new in a vaccuum is surely not as easy as learning something your friend (or even enemy) already knows. I may not be as eloquent as many on the forums, but this makes perfect sense to me. And if you look at the formula, it's actually not a huge difference.

Very few technologies in history were developed in isolation by every civ who developed them. Most technological developments were passed on by some sort of diffusion process - either copied wholesale, or just the general idea and the specifics worked out again. Writing, for example, was probably only ever invented entirely de novo two or three times (in Sumeria and Mesoamerica, and probably also in China) - everyone else inherited at least parts of other peoples' ideas to create their own systems.
And isolated peoples have in fact tended to be far, far slower than well-connected ones at developing technologies - to a FAR greater degree than any civ game would ever dare to model.

I think a tech diffusion model is one thing Civ V really needs (if it does have one, it's very very weak). It's an important rubberband mechanism to ensure that civs that might be out of the running for the victory don't just languish as complete non-entities forever, and it of course gives those isolated civs a chance to start catching up a bit once they do make contact. Of course they'll never get anywhere near the big boys with this sort of system (the closer they get to parity, the lesser the benefits become), but it will at least ensure that half the civs don't languish two or three eras behind the rest.

Why shouldn't an isolated CIV be in worse position tech wise? Learning something new in a vaccuum is surely not as easy as learning something your friend (or even enemy) already knows. I may not be as eloquent as many on the forums, but this makes perfect sense to me. And if you look at the formula, it's actually not a huge difference.

Because an isolated civ is in bad position already as it can't do resource sells or research agreements until meeting someone. I'm valuing game play balance more than realism here.

Look in the Strategy Articles Forum... there should be a number cruncher thread

Ah so there was a formula after all as I thought... Thanks. And the general rule is (since it's not based on percentage of civs , but on the actual number), the more civs in a game, the cheaper the techs, as far as you keep exploring and knowing more and more.

Someone more knowledgeable than us has already posted the formula (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10469954&postcount=83).

Short answer, the number of civs you know who know the tech reduces the cost.

That's the post I am usually referencing when I've talked about it in my LP's.

Ah so there was a formula after all as I thought... Thanks. And the general rule is (since it's not based on percentage of civs , but on the actual number), the more civs in a game, the cheaper the techs, as far as you keep exploring and knowing more and more.

as long as those civs also know the techs, then yes. (early game is sped up if you can meet everyone quickly)

OK, I guess I've learned something -- and I apologize for implying that everyone else was stupid.:blush:

I really still don't believe it though. The formula on the "number crunchers" thread was posted a couple of months before the change which allowed :c5science: to be carryied over and well before the RA change.

Yes the more science you have the faster techs get researched, but it doesn't make them cheaper. Go to the tech tree when you reach the renaissance era. Check the cost for techs in the same level of the tree. If you are ahead of everyone in tech, this won't work. If there are multiple civs ahead of you in tech, then you will see that techs that are in the same level will cost different amounts.
I am definitely not the one who said that techs became cheaper -- I only said that the number of beakers going toward the tech purchase price directly correlates with population, and this beaker production is modified upwards by science buildings.

That's the post I am usually referencing when I've talked about it in my LP's.



as long as those civs also know the techs, then yes. (early game is sped up if you can meet everyone quickly)

That's what I meant. Deity AI is given free techs too so it's always a plus to explore like mad in the early game.

as long as those civs also know the techs, then yes. (early game is sped up if you can meet everyone quickly)

Is this something worth taking into account when choosing techs? e.g. delay taking techs you know the AI likes because you'll be able to get them cheaper later.

Is this something worth taking into account when choosing techs? e.g. delay taking techs you know the AI likes because you'll be able to get them cheaper later.

Sure, in a vacuum where your only concern is the "cost" of a tech. In game, concerns such as "I need Riflemen NOW" or similar may be more pressing. Essentially, it depends how urgently you need a tech.

Tbh, I didn't even know such a discount existed until this thread. It's interesting the things you learn just walking around. :)

Is this something worth taking into account when choosing techs? e.g. delay taking techs you know the AI likes because you'll be able to get them cheaper later.

it will affect your RA choice of techs, at the very least. If all civs but you have a tech, and it's your 'median' tech, then you're getting less than you could otherwise by clearing it vs. another tech that no one has.

Other than that, need is more important than waiting for cheaper techs, especially if those techs are very important to you.

It's also part of the reason why a run to Education works well. A lot of the AIs will go towards gunpowder or chivalry, which means that when you're done Education and coming back the other way, those techs are cheaper. (with you having a higher bpt by then)

But how do you know which ones all the other civs have and which they don't? Unless you're constantly keeping track of the costs of each tech and know everything by heart, It's kinda impossible to know.

Except of course the techs that have immediate results, like the ones that give a new upgraded unit (seeing everyone having knights, lets you know that they have Chivalry for example).

But how do you know which ones all the other civs have and which they don't? Unless you're constantly keeping track of the costs of each tech and know everything by heart, It's kinda impossible to know.

Except of course the techs that have immediate results, like the ones that give a new upgraded unit (seeing everyone having knights, lets you know that the have Chivalry for example).

You pretty much play it by ear. (despite claims to the opposite, you won't know exactly who has what techs)

There is usually a tech on the same y axis that hasn't been researched by anyone (generally highest beaker value) so you can use that as your basis. Then just see how low the lowest one is in comparison. If you want to go really far in it, you can reverse the calculation that was linked to, to find the number of alive civs that have the tech. But it's a waste of time, mostly.

Definitely seeing units and/or wonders will tell you roughly where the AIs are in tech. (assume +2-3 or more techs for units and 6-8 more techs for wonders)

You pretty much play it by ear. (despite claims to the opposite, you won't know exactly who has what techs)

There is usually a tech on the same y axis that hasn't been researched by anyone (generally highest beaker value) so you can use that as your basis. Then just see how low the lowest one is in comparison. If you want to go really far in it, you can reverse the calculation that was linked to, to find the number of alive civs that have the tech. But it's a waste of time, mostly.

Definitely seeing units and/or wonders will tell you roughly where the AIs are in tech. (assume +2-3 or more techs for units and 6-8 more techs for wonders)

Yeah that's what I thought too. So that means that when you're trying Deity games like OCC ones, (either Cultural or Science) and you can't have the advantage in tech, it's better to add more civs in the game and/or play Pangaea so you can meet as many civs as possible right?

(Also, a little bit off topic but I'd like to see a strategy article of you on how to achieve a Cultural victory on Deity...OCC or not, without building/getting from the AI, almost any wonders. I really want to know if it's possible)